BICSI RCDD Exam Dumps & Practice Test Questions

Question 1:

The designer must decide the best course of action. What should the designer do?

A. Reject the submittal after verifying if it meets relevant standards.
B. Approve the submittal after inquiring about additional warranty coverage.
C. Approve the submittal after confirming code compliance.
D. Approve the submittal after confirming the substitute meets all critical features of the originally specified product.

Answer: D

Explanation:

When an ICT distribution designer is presented with a product that does not exactly match the original contract specifications, careful evaluation is essential to determine if the substitute product will still fulfill the project’s requirements. This situation often arises due to delays in manufacturing or shipping, where the originally specified item is unavailable, prompting consideration of an alternative.

The primary responsibility of the designer is to ensure that the substitute product matches all vital functional and technical characteristics of the originally specified item. This includes aspects such as performance parameters, compatibility, capacity, and other critical features that affect the system’s overall operation. Approving the submittal only after confirming that these significant attributes are met ensures the project’s integrity and functionality remain intact.

Rejecting the submittal outright (Option A) may be premature unless the product clearly fails to meet essential standards or project needs. Such rejection without thorough evaluation could cause unnecessary delays. Option B, which suggests approval based on additional warranty offers, is not the best approach because warranties do not replace the necessity of the product meeting technical requirements. They merely provide coverage if problems arise later and cannot substitute for initial compliance.

Option C focuses solely on code compliance, which is necessary but insufficient. Meeting local or industry codes does not guarantee the product will satisfy all operational and technical specifications detailed in the contract.

Therefore, the most appropriate action is Option D: approve the submittal only after thoroughly verifying that the substitute product satisfies all key features and functionalities required by the project. This approach balances flexibility with due diligence to maintain project standards.

Question 2:

How is the simplified "cone of protection" defined for lightning strike protection around a structure like a building or pole?

A. 43 meters (140 feet)
B. The base diameter is equal to the structure’s height
C. The base radius is equal to the structure’s height
D. 50% of the structure’s height in all directions

Answer: C

Explanation:

The concept of a “cone of protection” in lightning protection refers to the zone around a structure where the risk of a direct lightning strike is minimized or eliminated by the presence of a lightning rod or similar protective device. This model is based on the principle that lightning tends to strike the highest point in a given area, so a properly installed lightning rod protects the structure beneath a theoretical cone-shaped area.

The simplified approach to defining this protected area uses the height of the structure as a key measurement. Specifically, the radius of the protected zone at ground level is equal to the height of the lightning protection system or the structure itself. This creates a cone extending outward from the top of the rod or building down to the ground, with the radius at the base being the same as the height. For example, if a pole is 30 meters tall, the protected zone extends in a 30-meter radius around its base.

Reviewing the other options clarifies why they are incorrect: Option A (43 meters or 140 feet) is a fixed arbitrary distance and doesn’t account for the height of the structure, which is fundamental in this calculation. Option B suggests the diameter equals the height, which doubles the radius and thus exaggerates the protected zone beyond standard practice. Option D claims the radius is only half the height, which underestimates the protection zone and is not consistent with typical lightning protection guidelines.

Thus, the accepted simplified model uses the structure’s height to define the radius of the protection zone, making C the correct choice. This approach ensures a clear and practical guideline for designing effective lightning protection systems.

Question No 3:

When designing an underground entrance facility, what is the minimum number of 103 metric designator conduits (4 trade size) that an ICT distribution designer should specify?

A. 2 Conduits
B. 3 Conduits
C. 4 Conduits
D. 6 Conduits

Correct Answer: B

Explanation:

When planning an underground entrance facility for ICT infrastructure, one of the primary concerns is ensuring there are enough conduits to safely house cables while allowing room for future growth. The "103 metric designator" refers to a standard conduit size, commonly 4 inches in diameter (4 trade size), widely used in ICT installations to accommodate telecommunications and data cables.

The minimum number of conduits required must balance current cable needs with future scalability. Specifying too few conduits risks constraining the system as demand grows, while too many conduits can lead to unnecessary costs and wasted space. Best practices and industry standards recommend providing at least three conduits in this scenario.

This number allows for redundancy and flexibility. Typically, two conduits are used to separate primary cables for operational and backup purposes, ensuring continuous service if one conduit needs maintenance or replacement. The third conduit acts as a spare, providing space for future cable installations or upgrades without the need for additional excavation, which can be costly and disruptive.

Choosing only two conduits (Option A) could limit the facility’s ability to expand or quickly repair systems, potentially leading to service interruptions. Conversely, specifying four or six conduits (Options C and D) might exceed the immediate requirements, increasing material and installation costs unnecessarily unless the facility supports very large or complex networks.

Therefore, specifying three conduits is a practical and efficient choice, aligning with standard ICT infrastructure guidelines. It ensures the system is both reliable and scalable, accommodating present demands and future technological advancements, while maintaining cost-effectiveness and ease of maintenance.

Question No 4:

Which transmission category can 66-style connecting blocks support, given certain designs and configurations?

A. Category 3
B. Category 5
C. Category 5e
D. Category 6
E. Category 6A

Correct Answer: C

Explanation:

66-style connecting blocks have historically been used in telephony and early data networking installations. These blocks serve as termination points for wiring and facilitate connections in structured cabling systems. Their ability to support various transmission categories depends on their design and quality.

The key category that 66-style blocks can reliably support is Category 5e (enhanced), making Option C the correct answer. Category 5e is an improvement over the older Category 5 standard and supports Gigabit Ethernet speeds (up to 1 Gbps) with frequencies up to 100 MHz. With the right design and installation practices, 66-style blocks can meet these performance requirements, making them suitable for many modern networking environments.

Older categories like Category 3 (Option A) are primarily associated with voice and low-speed data applications, supporting speeds up to 10 Mbps. Although 66 blocks could work for Category 3, this standard is largely obsolete in current network setups.

Category 5 (Option B) was once the prevalent standard for data transmission, but it has largely been replaced by Category 5e due to improved performance, particularly in reducing crosstalk and interference.

Higher categories like Category 6 and 6A (Options D and E) support much faster data rates and higher frequencies (up to 250 MHz and 500 MHz, respectively). These categories require cabling and termination hardware specifically designed for these speeds. Using 66-style blocks for Category 6 or 6A is uncommon and generally not recommended because these blocks do not provide the performance consistency or shielding required for these advanced standards.

In summary, 66-style blocks, when properly designed, are typically rated to support Category 5e performance, which balances compatibility with existing cabling infrastructure and support for modern Gigabit Ethernet networks.

Question 5:

How frequently should open RFIs (Requests for Information) be reviewed to maintain effective project communication?

A. daily
B. bi-weekly
C. weekly
D. bi-monthly

Answer: C

Explanation:

Managing open RFIs efficiently is vital to keeping projects on schedule and ensuring smooth communication among all stakeholders, including contractors, suppliers, and project managers. RFIs represent queries or requests that require timely responses to avoid delays in decision-making or work execution. The review frequency of these RFIs plays a significant role in maintaining momentum and preventing bottlenecks.

A weekly review is generally regarded as the optimal cadence. This approach strikes a balance by allowing enough time for responsible parties to prepare responses while still ensuring that open questions are addressed promptly. Conducting reviews every week encourages a consistent workflow, making it easier to identify outstanding or escalated issues and keep all team members informed.

Although a daily review might appear thorough, it can be unnecessarily demanding and inefficient, particularly on larger projects where the volume of RFIs can be substantial. Daily checks may result in over-monitoring, causing distractions and diverting resources from other critical tasks without providing significant benefit.

On the other end of the spectrum, bi-weekly or bi-monthly reviews are usually too infrequent. Delaying review meetings for such long periods may allow RFIs to accumulate unchecked, increasing the risk of project delays, miscommunications, and potential conflicts among stakeholders. Such gaps in communication can negatively impact project timelines and quality.

By reviewing RFIs on a weekly basis, project managers maintain control and visibility over information requests, facilitating timely resolutions and keeping the project on track. This approach also helps manage expectations and promotes transparency among all involved parties, contributing to overall project success.

Question 6:

Which two of the following tasks are typically part of the project closeout phase? (Select two.)

A. Notify responsible parties of any discrepancies
B. Initiate testing of installed infrastructure
C. Assess the project environment and inform the communications team
D. Retain legal counsel for representation
E. Develop a schedule to complete the punch list

Answer: A, E

Explanation:

The project closeout phase is crucial for wrapping up all activities, ensuring the project meets contractual obligations, and finalizing any remaining tasks before official completion. This phase is about verifying deliverables, addressing outstanding issues, and documenting final project outcomes.

A. Notify responsible parties of any discrepancies:
Identifying and communicating discrepancies is fundamental during closeout. These discrepancies could include deviations from design specifications, installation errors, or incomplete work. Informing contractors or suppliers about these issues ensures they have the opportunity to correct them, helping to deliver a final product that aligns with expectations and contract requirements. Clear communication during this stage reduces the risk of unresolved problems after project handover.

E. Develop a schedule to complete the punch list:
The punch list consists of minor repairs, adjustments, or outstanding tasks that must be resolved before project completion. Creating a schedule to manage and complete these items ensures accountability and timely resolution. It provides a clear plan to systematically close out all small but important details, guaranteeing that the project is truly finished and ready for client acceptance.

The other options are less applicable to the closeout phase:

B. Initiate testing of installed infrastructure is normally done earlier during commissioning or quality assurance, not at closeout. Final checks may occur during closeout, but the bulk of testing is typically completed beforehand.

C. Assessing the project environment and reporting to communications is generally a task during early project phases, such as site surveys or risk assessments, rather than at closeout.

D. Hiring legal counsel is not a standard closeout activity unless there are disputes or legal complications. Legal involvement typically occurs during contract negotiation or conflict resolution stages.

Thus, notifying stakeholders of discrepancies and scheduling punch list completion are key closeout responsibilities that help finalize projects successfully.

Question 7:

During construction phases such as rough-in, drywall installation, and exterior siding, telecommunications cabling (including voice, data, video, security, audio, and control cables) is vulnerable to damage. To ensure proper installation, acceptance testing—which includes visual inspection and qualification or certification of copper or fiber cabling—is required.

At which two stages is verification testing typically performed? (Select two.)

A. After the construction contract is accepted and approved by the Project Manager
B. Before insulation and drywall are installed
C. Before installing cable trays for spurs or areas that might damage cables
D. During the cabling trim-out stage after painting
E. After construction is completed

Answer: B, C

Explanation:

Verification testing of telecommunications cabling is essential to confirm that installations meet specifications and will perform reliably before they become difficult or impossible to access. This testing helps prevent future system failures caused by damage or incorrect installation during construction.

The most effective times to perform verification testing are before insulation and drywall installation (B) and before the cable tray system installation for spurs or vulnerable points (C). These stages are critical because the cabling is still exposed and accessible, allowing technicians to visually inspect and electronically test the infrastructure without obstruction. Testing at these points helps identify issues such as miswiring, damage, or substandard materials, enabling corrections before subsequent construction stages conceal the cabling.

Option A, which mentions contract approval, refers to administrative processes unrelated to physical verification of cabling. Testing occurs during construction, not as a post-contract formal step. Option D relates to the trim-out stage, which happens after drywall and painting; at this stage, access to cables is limited and repairs or retesting can be costly or impossible. Option E, testing after construction completion, is often too late, as damage caused during finishing work would require rework or partial demolition to fix.

In summary, conducting verification testing at the stages immediately before insulation/drywall installation and before cable tray installation ensures proper validation of cabling integrity and installation quality. This approach minimizes the risk of hidden defects and prevents costly rework or system outages after construction progresses.

Question 8:

When planning the communications distribution horizontal pathway to accommodate Building Automation System (BAS) infrastructure, what is the recommended floor area allocation per BAS outlet or device that designers should use for accurate sizing and cost estimation?

A. 9.30 m² (100 ft²)
B. 23.20 m² (250 ft²)
C. 91.40 m² (300 ft²)
D. 152.40 m² (500 ft²)

Answer: B

Explanation:

In designing the communications distribution pathway for systems like Building Automation Systems (BAS), it’s critical to estimate the appropriate floor area allocation per BAS outlet or device to ensure proper capacity, routing, and cost accuracy. This allocation guides how much cabling infrastructure and space are needed to support the system’s components distributed across the building.

The standard recommendation is 23.20 m² (250 ft²) per BAS outlet or device (B). This value balances efficiency and functionality, allowing adequate space for cable routing and pathway infrastructure without overestimating material needs or inflating costs unnecessarily.

Choosing too small an area, such as 9.30 m² (100 ft²) (A), risks congesting the pathway with insufficient space for cables, which could lead to installation difficulties, future maintenance problems, or the need for costly upgrades later. Conversely, allocations like 91.40 m² (300 ft²) (C) or 152.40 m² (500 ft²) (D) are excessive for most typical BAS deployments, leading to wasted resources and inflated project budgets.

The 23.20 m² figure typically accounts for the average device density and supports scalability, ensuring pathways can handle additional devices or upgrades without becoming overcrowded. This area also aligns well with industry best practices, offering a practical balance between cost-efficiency and reliable system performance.

In conclusion, by using 23.20 m² per BAS outlet or device, designers can provide accurate estimates and ensure the communications infrastructure supports current and future BAS requirements effectively and economically.

Question 9:

Which method involves using fire-resistant barriers to restrict the spread of fire and smoke within a building?

A. Suppression
B. Prevention
C. Compartmentation
D. Detection

Answer: C

Explanation:

The technique of controlling fire and smoke by employing fire-resistant barriers within a structure is known as compartmentation. This approach is fundamental to fire safety design and involves dividing a building into smaller, isolated sections or compartments using fire-rated walls, floors, and doors. These barriers are engineered to withstand fire and smoke passage for a specified duration, giving occupants crucial time to evacuate and allowing firefighters to respond more effectively.

The primary objective of compartmentation is to contain fire and smoke within a limited area, preventing rapid spread to other parts of the building. This containment minimizes property damage, enhances occupant safety, and aids emergency responders by controlling fire progression. Materials commonly used for these fire-resistive barriers include concrete, fire-rated gypsum boards, and steel assemblies, all tested to meet specific fire endurance ratings.

It is important to distinguish compartmentation from other fire protection concepts:

• Suppression (A) involves actively extinguishing the fire after it has started, using systems like sprinklers and fire extinguishers. It focuses on putting out fires rather than containing them.

• Prevention (B) aims to reduce the chance of a fire occurring through hazard elimination, safe storage of flammables, and maintenance. It is a proactive approach but does not address containing fire once it ignites.

• Detection (D) relates to identifying the presence of fire early through smoke detectors or heat sensors. While vital for alerting occupants and initiating responses, it does not prevent the spread of fire or smoke.

In conclusion, compartmentation plays a vital role in fire safety by physically restricting the movement of fire and smoke within buildings. This containment strategy protects lives and property and complements other fire safety measures such as suppression, prevention, and detection. Therefore, the correct answer is C.

Question 10:

A designer is labeling components in a data center room labeled 2A on the second floor with 10 rows of cabinets. What is the correct label for the bonding and grounding conductor connecting the first cabinet in the 6th row to the data center ground bar?

A. 2A/R601.1
B. 2A-SBB/R601.1
C. 2/R6
D. TEF1/R601.1

Answer: B

Explanation:

In data centers, accurate and standardized labeling of all electrical elements—including bonding and grounding conductors—is essential for safety, efficient maintenance, and rapid troubleshooting. Labeling ensures that personnel can quickly and accurately identify circuits, connections, and equipment, which is crucial in complex infrastructures like data centers.

The question focuses on labeling the bonding and grounding conductor between the first cabinet in the 6th row of room 2A and the data center’s ground bar. Bonding and grounding conductors provide a safe path to earth, protecting equipment and personnel from electrical faults. Proper labels for these conductors should clearly convey location and function.

Here’s an analysis of the options:

• Option A (2A/R601.1) references the room and a regulation or standard (likely a grounding code), but it doesn’t explicitly identify the conductor as bonding or grounding or specify the bonding bar.

• Option B (2A-SBB/R601.1) is the most descriptive. It includes the room number (2A), “SBB” (likely meaning Specific Bonding Bar), and the regulation code (R601.1). This label explicitly identifies the conductor as connected to the bonding bar and references the applicable standard, making it the best choice.

• Option C (2/R6) provides the room and row number but lacks any indication of grounding or bonding specifics or standard references. It’s too vague for proper electrical labeling.

• Option D (TEF1/R601.1) seems unrelated to the specified bonding conductor and instead might indicate a different component or system, making it unsuitable.

In summary, the correct label must clearly identify the conductor’s function, location, and reference code. Option B meets all these criteria, making it the appropriate choice for labeling the bonding and grounding conductor between the first cabinet in row 6 and the ground bar in room 2A.